What Is With All The Angry, Anti-Women Sentiment? (psycho, dysfunction, perfect)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd bet 90% of divorces could be smoothly handled without the interference of court. The courts exist only to fuel their own high wages, and to fuel attorneys...and of course to drive a wedge into a huge population of America.
The Uniform Divorce Bill "The greatest project NAWL has ever undertaken" is the description given by committee chair Matilda Fenberg to NAWL's pioneering work to create a Uniform Divorce Bill. At the 1947 NAWL convention in Cleveland, it was voted to draft and promote a bill that would embody the ideal of no-fault divorce(emphasis by Ameiko). A draft prepared by Fenberg, working with NAWL past presidents Helen M. Cirese and J. Helen Slough, was approved at the 1952 convention in Berkeley, California.
Although the National Conference of Commissioners of Uniform State Laws had attempted to produce such a bill since its founding in 1892, Fenberg was informed that the Conference could receive bills or suggestions only from the ABA. Fenberg-who had been the first woman student at Yale Law School in 1919-then undertook a campaign to convince the ABA to create a Family Law Section. Three years later, in 1955, the section was approved. Fenberg was appointed chair of the Subcommittee on Migratory Divorce. In 1960 the bill was introduced to the ABA, which sent it to the Conference.
In 1965, the Conference commenced the task of drafting, and in 1970 produced, the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (amended in 1971 and 1973). By 1977, the divorce portions had been adopted by nine states. Following this, the momentum for uniformity waned, but the ideal of no-fault divorce became the guiding principle for reformof divorce laws in the majority of states (again, emphasis by Ameiko)
More current examples from NOW's website on their general attempts to change family court law:
Become a citizen lobbyist and draft legislation, lobby for bills and educate your representatives!
You can help draft legislation to fix problems in the court system, and to institute new policies to protect mothers and their children from abuse (see the legislative section of this website for examples of good and bad legislation). Contact a representative who you believe might be interested and come in with a plan for the language and strategy of the bill.
Lobby for good legislation by writing, calling or going to the capitol to tell your representatives and others why the legislation is good and justified. Testify for the bill. Ask your representative (and others) to vote for the bill if it gets to the floor for a vote.
Lobby against bad legislation by following "fathers' rights groups" websites and email lists to find out what bills they are working on.(emphasis by Ameiko) Present the committee that is holding the hearing with information opposing the legislation (see sample testimony on "joint custody" bills in the legislative section of this website). Testify against the bill. Ask your representative (and others) to vote against the bill if it gets to the floor.
Released on June 29, 2000, at the Smart Marriages conference in Denver, Colo., the Statement pledges that "in this decade we will turn the tide on marriage and reduce divorce and unmarried childbearing, so that each year more children will grow up protected by their own two happily married parents and more adults' marriage dreams will come true."
which NOW misinterpreted (deliberately) as:
"The marriage movement is giving women the message that a bad husband and father is better than none at all. Single moms are being demonized," says NOW Executive Vice President Kim Gandy. "NOW is committed to exposing and organizing against this deliberate return to the days of unchallenged male control."
I can keep looking for more historical data but the point has been proven: feminist groups have actively campaigned to both alter family court law and maintain these laws even if they hurt men.
When Pennsylvania passed its no-fault divorce law in 1980, Pennsylvania NOW was not wholly in favor of the move without some guarantee of economic protection for women and children.
Basically, no problem with no fault divorce as long as women get alimony as well as child custody and thus child support (screw the man).
From Wikipedia but it is cross referenced. More of an individual feminist than group. I'm getting tired of going through webpages... the evidence is there for those who want to find it:
In addition, advocates for no-fault divorce argued that the law should be changed to provide a straightforward procedure for ending a marriage, rather than forcing a couple who simply couldn't get along to choose between living together in "marital hell" or lying under oath in open court. The most prominent advocate of this position was feminist law professor Herma Hill Kay (who later became dean of UC Berkeley School of Law).[5]
References:
^ Bishop, Katherine. "Sweet Victory for Feminist Pioneer at Law School." The New York Times, 3 April 1992, sec. A, p. 19
I'd bet 90% of divorces could be smoothly handled without the interference of court. The courts exist only to fuel their own high wages, and to fuel attorneys...and of course to drive a wedge into a huge population of America.
We agree on something! Cool!
Some states (and England) are being urged by lawyers and juges to actually equate co-habitation and other relationships to marriages in terms of legal protection. I guess with falling marriage rates, they are worried about their pay checks!
Some states (and England) are being urged by lawyers and juges to actually equate co-habitation and other relationships to marriages in terms of legal protection. I guess with falling marriage rates, they are worried about their pay checks!
I agree with you that Family Law is a gigantic injustice into both the lives of men and women. I just won't agree that women caused it. They have to play by the rules too or else they are usually beaten into shape by threats from CPS.
I agree with you that Family Law is a gigantic injustice into both the lives of men and women. I just won't agree that women caused it. They have to play by the rules too or else they are usually beaten into shape by threats from CPS.
Women, specifically professional women, joining to advocate for women's rights certainly doesn't lend to unapproachable power. It's comprises a voice to be heard and rightly so given history. Nothing cited so far provides information that backs up the bologna given on this forum. Of course, the loudest voice in this thread the past day or so is a self-admitted troll. That is very telling.
When Pennsylvania passed its no-fault divorce law in 1980, Pennsylvania NOW was not wholly in favor of the move without some guarantee of economic protection for women and children.
Basically, no problem with no fault divorce as long as women get alimony as well as child custody and thus child support (screw the man).
Here are the three sentences following the one you quoted.
It is well-documented that after divorce women's income generally goes down, while men's overall income increases. No-fault divorce laws allow couples to split on the basis of irreconcilable differences without going to trial and without the requirement of establishing fault. Many advocates say it is a fairer way of ending dysfunctional marriages than the fault-based system, which often involves lengthy, expensive legal battles.
That doesn't say "screw the man" to me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
